Anita Jacobs-Royer. (Photo: Joan Richardson-Kwak)
In Cruz’s version, he says he left Manello at the house and walked straight to the Trailways bus station. But police believe that the presence of a second person at the crime scene, and Cruz’s denial that he took Jacobs-Royer’s car, is fiction. Chief Assistant District Attorney John Tobin who prosecuted the case said the wealth of evidence, including video establishing Cruz’s route through Kingston, makes it clear that he was alone at the crime scene. Tobin added that Manello was one of the number of men, including Jacobs-Royer’s estranged husband who were interviewed, provided DNA samples and were cleared of any involvement in the case.
“This is a savvy guy who’s spent his whole life in prison trying to think on his feet,” said Van Allen of Cruz’s evasions during the confession.
Tobin said he believes both the method and the motive in the case are clear — cold-blooded murder and robbery. Tobin noted that given Jacobs-Royer’s level of intoxication and the lack of defensive wounds or signs of a struggle, the assault was sudden, unprovoked and totally unexpected.
As for motive, Tobin pointed to an intake interview with medical staff at the Ulster County Jail on Feb. 11. Cruz tells a nurse that he’d been taking drugs continually for 10 days.
“The reasons why he killed her are quite apparent,” said Tobin. “He intended to steal property and cash from her house so he could buy drugs.”
During his interview with detectives, Cruz hints at a different motive. He says at one point “I guess I needed money for car insurance.” And when detectives allow him to call his wife, he tells a tearful Ball-Douglas that he “took somebody’s life” because he needed money “for that thing we talked about.”
‘Just snapped’
Public Defender Andrew Kossover took on the unenviable task of defending Cruz. Faced with a bounty of evidence — Cruz’s DNA appears in Jacobs-Royer’s car, on the bootlace and on her neck and a full confession — Kossover did not contest guilt, but sought a defense based on intent. Kossover successfully appealed to County Court Judge Don Williams to allow the jury to consider two lesser charges — first- and second-degree manslaughter, based on the theory that Cruz intended to cause serious physical injury to his victim, but not kill her; the second that he acted with reckless disregard for her life, but without the intent to cause her death. Kossover said that Cruz had no motive to kill a woman who had been trying to help him and that believes Cruz’s own explanation offered repeatedly during his confession and phone calls to his wife and daughter that he “just snapped” when he attacked Jacobs-Royer.
“They were friends, he had no motive, no reason to harm her therefore, even though he caused her death, I don’t think it was an intentional act,” said Kossover. “He really just lost it.”
The jury didn’t buy it. They took only a few hours to deliberate last Friday before they came back with their verdict. So the tragic chain of events which started with an act of kindness will end in two months with the bang of a gavel and the clang of a closing prison door.
I feel so horrible for the victim and her family. It could have all been prevented if she had not tried to help him personally, but had offered her help in other ways around the community. I’m not blaming her. I just don’t understand the mentality of women (and men) who think they can help these extremely violent people when they don’t have the real resources or skills to deal with violent people like this. I have a friend here who is doing the same thing, and I am so afraid she will be found in the same situation. She thinks she’s helping this person, but she’s just putting herself in jeopardy. So so so sad. I can’t imagine the horror she went through.
Illegal drugs have been and will continue to be the downfall of society.
Excellent police work.
But curious judgement from the bench: “Kossover successfully appealed to County Court Judge Don Williams to allow the jury to consider two lesser charges — first- and second-degree manslaughter, based on the theory…”
This hardened con strangled her with shoe laces, but he only intended to harm her, not kill her? HIS attack on her caused HIM to “snap?”
Maybe there’s a strategic courtroom reason behind this I don’t understand.
Thank god this guy is off the streets of Kingston.
First of all I must say Anita was my very good friend and she was my Volunteer Co-coordinator at the Hudson Valley Raptor Center so I knew her very well. When the tragic news of her death reached me I was stunned beyond compare and am still grieving. I likewise don’t get how a murderer who in his own confession tied a bootlace around her neck “just in case” could be defended to any lessor charge than he rightfully deserved. Just in case what? That she survived his attack and was able to testify against him? He strangled her, lifted her off the floor, dropped her THEN he tied the shoelace around her neck… JUST IN CASE. Killed her for a measly amount of money that knowing her she would have handed over to him. The agony of the tragic loss of a dear friend is unreleasable even by a capture and conviction. But to now have some of the details of forensic evidence it is more shocking, more horrific and more heart breaking that this were to ever have happened. Death at the hands of one she gave a helping hand too. I believe she may have even told me about helping him in some of our last conversations, but then again it may have been someone else. She was truly that KINDHEARTED. You are a SAINT ANITA and CRUZ IS A DEVIL. Let me also say that it was never my experience in all the times we had shared together where alcohol was being consumed or was available to ever see Anita in anything even close to being highly intoxicated. There are ways of forcing alcohol into a person. Jimi Hendrix was murdered. Unless she changed since I last saw her or “hid” it from me, Anita was not one to abuse alcohol so I think the blood levels also was evidence of this MONSTER’s intent.